2025:CGHC:47749 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 10616 of 2025 1 - Usha Netam W/o Shri Banshilal Aged About 42 Years R/o Municipal Council Bijapur Premises, Bijapur District - Bijapur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Collector Bijapur, District- Bijapur (C.G.) 3 - District Education Officer Bijapur, District- Bijapur (C.G.) 4 - Principal Government Higher Secondary School Bhairamgarh District- Bijapur (C.G.) 5 - Shri Prahlad Jain In- Charge Block Education Officer, Bhairamgarh District - Bijapur (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra Pali, Advocate. For State : Mr. Keshav Prasad Gupta, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 17/09 /2025 1. The petitioner who is working as Lecturer (Panchayat) has filed this writ petition assailing order dated 14.07.2023 passed by respondent No. 5/ Principal, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Bhairamgarh, District- Bijapur (C.G.) by which her annual increment for the year 2023 has been withheld without cumulative effect. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Principal has no authority to pass the impugned order as according to him, the petitioner’s appointing authority is Director. He would further submit that without issuing any show cause notice or conducting any enquiry as well as affording any opportunity of hearing, the punishment has ARUN KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by ARUN KUMAR DEWANGAN Date: 2025.09.18 13:10:52 +0530 been imposed upon the petitioner and would pray for setting aside the impugned order dated 14.07.2023. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner and would submit that the impugned order is appealable order as per Rule 27 of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 (for short, 'the Rules, 1966'), as such the writ petition at this juncture is not maintainable. He would further submit that whether the impugned order has been passed by the authority who is competent or not is also no ground to interfere with the writ petition and would pray for rejection of the writ petition. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. Considering the submission made by the parties and also considering the fact that the petitioner has remedy of filing an appeal as per Rule 27 of the Rules of 1966 raising her grievances, therefore, this writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeal before the Director or Secretary, School Education Department within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order and the same shall be considered and decided by the Appellate Authority on its own merits without taking plea of limitation in preferring appeal as this Court has already condoned the delay in preferring the appeal. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge Arun